Upload
jihan
View
47
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Mixed-Mode Approaches in the Generations and Gender Survey Past Experience and Future Expectations. Aat Liefbroer Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute. Overview. Overview of the presentation. GGP: what is it? Past experience 3 rd wave of Dutch GGP 2010-2011 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Mixed-Mode Approaches in the Generations and Gender SurveyPast Experience and Future Expectations
Aat LiefbroerNetherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic
Institute
Overview of the presentation GGP: what is it? Past experience
3rd wave of Dutch GGP 2010-2011 Future expectations
Pilot 4th wave in Slovenia 2011 Blueprint for GGP 2015
Conclusions
Overview
Aim of the GGP To advance our knowledge on intergenerational and
gender relationships, with a focus on understanding gender inequalities and generational differences
Internationally comparable data on relationships between partners and between parents and adult children across Western societies
Main vehicles: Generations and Gender Survey (GGS) and Contextual Database
Overview
Characteristics of the GGS Broad age-range (18-79), because understanding demographic
challenges such as population ageing asks for a focus on both young and old people
Large-scale surveys on population challenges (N≈10,000) to allow in-depth analysis
Panel design to allow for better causal analysis and studying processes of adaptation to change
Cross-national to allow for examining the influence of the social context (including the policy context)
Theory-driven questionnaire design Contextual macro-level database to allow for multi-level analyses
Overview
GGP Countries
Wave 1 18 countries (data for 12 countries currently available)
Wave 2 Bulgaria, Netherlands, Australia, Germany, France, Hungary, Italy, Russian
Federation, Georgia (Bulgaria and Germany to be released this year)
Overview
Challenges for the future of the GGP
Increasing the number of participating countries Extending the data-collection beyond three waves
Reducing fieldwork costs Application of mixed mode design?
Overview
Dutch GGP 1st wave 2004 ≈ 8,200 respondents, CAPI 2nd wave 2007 ≈ 6,200 respondents, CAPI 3rd wave 2010 ≈ 4,300 respondents, mixed mode Response rate in 3rd wave: 72% of wave 2 participants Costs per respondent in 2nd wave: ≈ €195 Costs per respondent in 3rd wave: ≈ €115
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Distribution by mode
18%
27%
55%CAPICATIWEB
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Mode distribution by age
020406080
100
25-44 45-64 65-89
WEBCATICAPI
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Mode distribution by educational attainment
020406080
100
low medium high
WEBCATICAPI
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Missing income info by mode
02468
10
CAPI CATI WEB
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Percentage that does not mention earnings from labour
Disclosure
11.11.21.31.41.5
CAPI CATI WEB
withoutwith
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Mean score on loneliness scale by mode (with and without controls)
Attrition information (I)
50
60
70
80
90
CAPI CATI WEB
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Percentage that gives permission to contact their partner to fill out a questionnaire
Attrition information (II)
5060708090
100
CAPI CATI WEB
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Percentage that gives permission to link data to register data from Statistics Netherlands
Attrition information (III)
020406080
100
CAPI CATI WEB
noyes, decide lateryes, participate
3rd wave Dutch GGP
Percentage that gives permission to be recontacted for the fourth wave
Conclusions3rd wave Dutch GGP
WEB more popular than expected Missing values on WEB limited Small, but systematic mode effects in disclosure WEB respondents are less willing to give permission for
additional or future involvement
Pilot 4th wave Slovenia 2011Pilot Slovenia
Participating institutions University of Ljubljana (Lozar-Manfreda, Petrič) University Utrecht (Hox, De Leeuw) NIDI (Kveder, Liefbroer)
Study 1: comparison of mode effects Study 2: comparison of mixed mode systems
Comparison of mode effects Aim: testing new pilot and examination of potential mode
effects Sample: regular participants in commercial web panel,
randomly assigned to different modes Examination of
Item non-response Scalability of item sets Distributional characteristics Length of interview Evaluation of interview
Pilot Slovenia
Comparison of mode effects Item non-response only slightly higher in web, with one
clear exception….
Pilot Slovenia
Income
0
10
20
30
40
50
CAPI CATI WEB
refusaldon't know
Percentage of refusals and ‘do not know’ on question on household income
Pilot Slovenia
Comparison of mode effects Item non-response only slightly higher in web, with one
clear exception…. Scalability of item sets still has to be analysed First analyses of distributional characteristics suggest
More disclosure on social desirable and difficult questions Slightly higher variance in responses
Pilot Slovenia
Example
010203040
CAPI CATI WEB
Percentage answering ‘yes’ to the question ‘Over the past 12 months, have you thought about breaking up your relationship?’
Pilot Slovenia
Comparison of mode effects Item non-response only slightly higher in web, with one
clear exception…. Scalability of item sets still has to be analysed First analyses of distributional characteristics suggest
More disclosure on social desirable and difficult questions Slightly higher variance in responses
Interview took somewhat longer in CATI mode Evaluation of interview most negative in CATI mode
Pilot Slovenia
Duration of survey
4550556065
CAPI CATI WEB
Pilot Slovenia
Subjective length of survey
0
10
20
30
40
CAPI CATI WEB
Percentage stating ‘yes’ or ‘definitely yes’ to question whether the interview was judged too long
Pilot Slovenia
Comparison of mixed-mode systems (I)
Aim: testing of alternative mixed-mode systems Sample: two-stage random sample from the population
register Examination of
Response rate of different mixed-mode systems Costs of different mixed mode systems Evaluation of modes by a random sample
Pilot Slovenia
Comparison of mixed-mode systems (II)
Comparison of four ‘systems’ CAPI → WEB → CATI (no incentive offered) CATI → WEB → CAPI (no incentive offered) WEB → CATI → CAPI (no incentive offered) WEB → CATI → CAPI (incentive of € 5 offered)
Difference in response rate across systems Difference in costs across systems
Pilot Slovenia
Blueprint GGP 2015Blueprint GGP 2015
Blueprint for GGP 2015 should be ready by the end of 2012 Questionnaire GGP 2015 Sampling design Set of fieldwork rules
Whether to opt for mixed-modes, and if so when? Is it an option in the first wave (or in the first wave with a
refreshment sample), or in later waves only? What kind of mixed-mode system to prescribe?
ConclusionsConclusion
Overall, WEB seems to perform quite well in terms of answering patterns (item nonresponse, scalability and distribution of responses)
WEB leads to very considerable cost reductions The big issue that is not yet clear is whether attrition is
negatively affected Use of WEB in a first wave seems questionable (but pilot will give
partial answers) Use in later waves could lead to higher dropout in future waves as
a result of the legal requirement to ask for permission for re-contacting
Thank you for your attention!
Topics included Provision of care to older adults Successful ageing Economic participation of women and pre-pensioners Realisation of fertility intentions Balancing work and family life Gender equality in household and childcare labour
Overview
Members of Consortium Board Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NL) Institut National d’Études Démographiques (FR) Bocconi University (IT) Statistics Norway (NO) Demographic Research Institute (HU) Norwegian Social Research (NO) University of Ljubljana (SL) Utrecht University (NL) University of York (GB) Max-Planck Institute for Demographic Research (DE) Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL) Population Unit of the UN Economic Commission for Europe